so not actually current then since they won't be using NVG and, unless they are already at Sumburgh or Stornoway, not doing UK SAR either? How many of those will already be S92 qualified? How recent is their experience?

As a former Crab, with 22 years SAR experience on Wessex and Seaking, plus a couple of tours on SH (including flying PNG ops in NI whilst being shot at - probably before THE Crab was born) I feel that it is incumbent on me to apologise to all the civvy pilots and non ex Crabs for THE Crab's petulant behaviour in this Forum. This is what comes of abolishing corporal punishment and allowing youngsters to believe they are God's gift. A good smack round the head with a nav ruler at a formative stage, whilst sadly no longer permitted, might have done him some good!
Now, Corporal Punishment.....wasn't he at Chiv, back in '72 :E

Thankyou Al-Bert apology accepted :D but I have to say that Crab is one of main reasons more aircrew do not post on this thread, which I feel is a shame:rolleyes:

It's a shame really, for every petulant whinger (not just Crab!) that posts on here there's probably a hundred aircrew with really useful valuable opinions who are put off posting for fear of being dragged into a petty slanging match.

Apologies for getting back on thread but any thoughts on what the basing solution might be? I'll kick off with Lossie to Inverness.

or is just that people won't stand up for what they believe in?

Al-bert - I did the NI getting shot at thing too but with only the crewman having hand held goggles - we were on self-drive nitesun.

llamaman - the bases will stay the same - for the moment - so feel free to speculate.

It is only a slanging match when both sides make personal comments about each other - you might notice I don't actually do that - I just question some of the 'facts' that others present. If people can't handle debate without resorting to insults, that isn't my problem, it's theirs:)

Gents, you're spot on. Now, my rumour is Lec to Humberside with the S92. But it is just a rumour...

Gene

Regarding the basing solution; given all three operators in the running have existing bases and infrastructure around the country it’s going to be no surprise if they attempted to use those to keep costs down and maximise competitiveness.
For example, Humberside might be an alternative to Leconfield (all three operators have a presence there) but that will leave a large part of the east coast without cover once Bulmer closes as planned. Aberdeen is a possibility and another alternative to Inverness but some argue is too busy an airport for a SAR unit and risk having a rescue call sign being held for the incoming Thomson flight. That said the controllers there are very good at integrating rotary traffic with fixed wing and with the numerous ditching of aircraft recently they could perhaps do with the cover.
The other options that must be available to the operators are the use and development of green field sites away from busy airports but in areas where the asset is required. The other advantage of a purpose built unit is that after the initial capital outlay the running costs should be relatively low compared to the charges levied by airports in particular HIAL; should the rumours be correct of course and I’ve heard Prestwick is pretty pricey too. Given the contract length has been reduced to 10 years this option may no longer be available. That said; Longside used to be owned by Bond and then perhaps CHC post merger and that may remain the case. Edzel might be another option; it’s on the doorstep of the Cairngorm national park and Leuchars could be used as a poor weather div given its coastal and easier to recover an aircraft to. Valley will share the same problem as Sumburgh and Stornoway in that people aren’t attracted by the location. So perhaps a move to Liverpool or Blackpool is on the cards to slot it between the Lake District and Snowdonia national parks.......
Chiv should stay where it is to keep Crab happy and I hope he doesn’t feel insulted by some of my teasing comments, that’s really not the intention. :ok:
The DofT have certainly allowed the operators to use their ingenuity and powers of lateral thinking providing they can prove their 10 base option is as efficient at providing the required SAR cover. It will be interesting to see what solution is eventually decided on. The preferred bidder announcement can’t be that far away providing the DofT select committee are happy with the answers provided to their recent questions.

Crab,

No, I'm sorry. A great many of us do believe in aspects of what is right or wrong with what may or may not happen over the next few years.

Being objective, I have read your posts over the years; many have had genuine, deep understanding and knowledge imparted on the various subject matters. I have, on occasion, publicly agreed and supported you. However, the common denominator, is that your posts have been blinkered, belligerent, anti civilianisation, and down right self righteous.

You have only yourself to blame for the way in which your name is discussed through a great many crew rooms throughout both navy, civilian AND Air Force crew rooms.

This is a rumours network, whereby people should feel free to CONSTRUCTIVELY debate.

I wish you all the luck in the world if you are prepared to integrate your obvious knowledge and professionalism within the progressive face of the future of UK SAR. I fear, however, that that might be a deck too rough........

Ray.

Yes Crab, that came after PNG, they were crap. And I also trialled 'self drive nitesun' - and your point is? :hmm:

Ray, a measured and reasoned post - thank you for praise and blame in equal measure.

One of the problems with posting (the same as texting) is that expression and meaning are often lost and, in attempting to get my concerns across, I can see how I have raised hackles in a number of camps.

I do acknowledge that at times I may have seemed distinctly anti but usually when the only arguments have been 'civsar is better because it's new so suck it up' often claiming capabilities that are not quite factual.

SARH could be the best thing since sliced bread but only if the civil servants, the politicians and the contractors are kept honest - this battle is still being fought in the assessment process now. If I have fostered debate by upsetting people but it prevents what happened when the 139 was introduced to service with inadequate lighting and no over water SAR modes then I can live with that.

Al-bert - you are older than me - I get that;)

Sigh!
 

And with age comes experiance, a broader perspective, and sometimes even wisdom - hope you get there, there might even be a civvy seat out there for you! ;)

well 2 out of 3's not bad;)

and you did start the 'been there done that';)

:E
don't forget the T Shirts........lots of them! :=

Anyone fancy doing some "Wet Decks" to these?............anyone........anyone.........anyone....:oo h:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f66_1355069307
In the future; did the DofT specify a beam me up device?

Don't fancy it anymore, but the FV would be ok if it turned downwind/sea or prob even slowed down. Not so sure about the warship though! :ooh:

IFR Piglet

There are many ways to mitigate the pitch roll and heave even in very rough seas - as Albert says. It was even more fun at night.:eek: You always have to balance the risk to your winchman and crew compared to the injuries to the casualty.There was nothing more frustrating than to battle, at night, through a gale to a trawler who had a crewman with chest pains to find he had forgotten to bring his angina tablets with him and was waiting on a heaving deck with his suitcase!! ( happened off Eire!)

http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/k...ticcropped.jpg

A pic from a Nimrod about 150mls into the Atlantic. I think we had just recovered the winchman and casualty when this was taken.

HF

Ah, must have been Lossie then - Brawdy would have been 250mls! ;)

On a different tack ('scuse the nautical pun), how will HSBC's £1.2Bn fine for money laundering affect one of the bidder's submission given that a large part of the competition process is to do with financial viability?

If there are enough fallers at the last hurdles for the process not to qualify as a competition - what then? Issue a single contract anyway? Buy S92s for the military???

Then there is the issue of all the outcry following and new and innovative basing solutions since MoD bases are likely to be a. too expensive and b. too much hassle to operate from. Someone needs a very pro-active PR department.

Oh and we're in a triple dip recession with no prospect for growth!

This could be shaping up to be an even bigger fiasco that the last event!

Hi Al-Bert

Though I was at Lossie as well this was from Brawdy. I can still remember that feeling of loneliness as the lights of EIRE disappeared behind one and the RCC controller told you that the Nimrod was just getting airborne as you still had over an hour and a half to the target.

Those were the days for youth and immortality:ok:

HF

Surely it must be clear, particularly given the timing of relevant changes in military commitments (carriers, Afghan exit), that if this all goes into Room 101 then that's what will fly out the other side. :-)


This is how it's done.
The future helicopter search and rescue service - regjeringen.no


It's not just the likes of HSBC who are 'merchant bankers'.
BBC News - Coastguards 'disillusioned' by changes to service, say MPs